If you received a 20% pay raise tomorrow, would you still feel aggrieved about the prices?

A lot of people are engrained with a way to judge prices based on their upbringing and life experiences. My parents wouldn't spend more than a dime on a candy bar, but they should be 50 cents to me. I won't pay $1 for a candy bar unless I'm desperate for food and a convince store is the only place around.

It's the same thing with houses. I can't see how anyone would spend $200,000 for a house unless they are a doctor or businessman... Houses cost $150k to me. Anything more is expensive, anything less is cheap.

Strange financial psychology, but it has an impact on the economy.

You must live in the South or parts of the Midwest!

A modest, regular little old house is like 280k+ in many parts of the country these days.

I noticed that the same company built my old apartment in both Los Angeles and in the South and it was $800 a month in one place and $2600 a month in the other!

Off topic but my $1500 a month appart in montreal cost me over $2500 a month in LA and the built quality was worst! I wish i could find a $150k hiuse near where i live....Tis way i could buy more lenses.

In my mind, they should release something in the $7-8k range in addition to the 1D C- for instance, how about a 5D C that does full (resolved) HD w/4k? My hunch is that they will probably consider something like this in the future but not until after they've milked the pro cinema market for the $12-15k 1D C. Because they know if they released a similar model in the $7-8k range the pro cinema people would just buy that.

But there are $8K models out there, just not by Canon, so why won't people by those instead?

It's not about how much money you have saved, it's about which other companies offer a better product for less.

Who has a better product for less? I haven't seen any referenced in any of the posts complaining about the price. The Sony, for instance, is incapable of 4K video at this time. And it will likely be more expensive once you put together all of the pieces necessary to make it work, not to mention being a larger form factor.

I still think that if it had of been announced at $8k, people would have been saying "Why isn't it $4k?".

If you're a professional and this is what you need then you work on your budget and find a way to make it fit and bring it into your tool set, not complain that it is a few $ more than you've saved.

It's not about how much money you have saved, it's about which other companies offer a better product for less.

I have an affair with Canon, but their pricing on some of their newer items are just too high. When others are doing it equally as good, if not better, FOR LESS, then why do I want to stick around.

Obviously, there are TONS of people out there who feel the same way.

If you received a 20% pay raise tomorrow, would you still feel aggrieved about the prices?

Considering my business *IS* video and Photography, I would purchase the best TOOL for the job.

The price -for what it's worth- is not that great.

There are Sony Cameras out there that boast similar or better specs for less.Plus this is supposed to be a DSLR...Why on earth would I spend that amount of money for a "still" camera that *happens* to have video.

If it was a full blown video camera, like the c300, there 'might' be consideration.But still, there are better items on the market for less.

Looking at the cost of one of those, I rather break the bank and just invest in a R.E.D.

I was really hoping Canon would surprise us with goodness, but it's looking like it gunna be overly expensive "crap"

the RED Scarlet is cheaper, i actually think the new canon will be a great camera, but people like to go with what works outs cheaper. you can get the scarlet pkg that included a monitor, batteries, drives, for about the same price.they have to make the new canon cinema body cheaper then the scarlet body, then i would buy one in a second.for this type of market its all about making your money back as fast as you can.one more shoot on my 5DMKIII and ill make my body price back!

“The Canon EOS-1D C digital SLR camera was designed in response to the needs of filmmakers, television producers, and other high-level motion-imaging professionals,” stated Yuichi Ishizuka, executive vice president and general manager, Imaging Technologies & Communications Group, Canon U.S.A. “Not only does it combine 4K and Full HD video capture with a convenient design, its use of dual CF cards also offers an efficient workflow compatible with today’s post-production requirements.”

If you're not in that group of people above then why are you complaining about the price?

Clearly Canon understands who its target audience is and clearly some people would like to think they're part of a group that quite clearly they're not.

I understand your logic, but in this case why a DSLR? This isn't what "high-level motion-imaging professionals" need.Thisisnot a specialized video camera, super basic features like SDI or XLR are missing, i mean even the display is 3:2, not even 16:9 !!This is just an unlocked 1DX

I can clear this up easily.

Form Factor.

Take for example the episode of house that was shot on the 5D2, The reason why they used that camera was due to its size, it was able to produce nice pictures and be able to be positioned in awkward spots to attain the best angles. Something that you can not do with a camera in a rig/cage or large footprint (ARRI etc).

The 1D-C increases the viewing format but keeps the form factor.

Its that simple.

As for those bitching about the price, its like point & shoot users complaining the xD series are too expensive. When in reality an xxxD would suit their needs.

I'm with you. As a filmmaker I would love this camera. High resolution in a small dslr form factor. Also it'll do great stills. Sold! However, I can't afford it. Just because I can't afford it doesn't mean Canon are out their minds when pricing it at 15k. Just means I need to work on gaining better gigs.

Honestly there is no other camera like this. A 4k dslr that stores media on CF cards.

I also see people making mistakes when comparing this camera to others. Sony's FS700 looks amazing, however it won't have the form factor of the 1DX C and it's not just $8k. You have to buy an external recorder that will cost thousands. Does great slow-motion, but I'll take resolution over that.

The RED Scarlet cost more than $10 to put you in the position to shoot. Then you have to buy their expensive storage cards.

What I don't see being mentioned is the fact that these Canon cameras are editing ready. They're ready to be used in your NLE system now. For RED cameras you need to change up your entire workflow.

$15k is a bit steep, I'm thinking it'll drop to a little over $10k. If so, hopefully people will stop whining. Consumers seem to want it all at dirt cheap.

The best bargain is the FS100 right now. However if you want something that provides more, you're going to have to pay more. In all actuality, $15k is pretty cheap.

The Sony FS700 is going to find a lot of happy homes, especially if the metabones adapter works for it. 300FPS slow-motion at 1080p, built in ND filters, future 4k upgrade, great low-light ability, $8,000 price tag. How can the C300 compete with the new Sony FS700 at twice the price with less features?

The C300 can't even do 1080 60p for christsakes.

Logged

gibbygoo

Working with 4k video isn't ideal for photojournalism in the slightest bit, it's complete overkill. It's just too much video power for someone that doesnt work in the production world. It would make way more sense for a photographer to get 2 1DX's and still be able to shoot great 1080p which is much easier to work with and performs exactly the same as the 1DC on the still side. This is a camera for the cinema world and nothing else. Anyone that is willing to buy this camera is going to be a serious filmmaker or a photographer with too much money, but it won't be a camera that tons of photographers run out and buy. [/quote]

gibbygoo

Any thinking videographer/photographer would get 2 cameras for that price (unless of course they wanna show off their toys ) 1D-X for stills and an FS700 for video would come to around $15k with more video friendly features from the FS700. FS700 gets you high frame rates/ND filters/XLR inputs/SDI. The reason HDDSLRs caught on was because of the price point.

Personally I would have opted for a lower mega pixel still camera with features slightly higher than the 60D.

That's exactly what I'm doing, and for those exact reasons, especially the XLR and frame rates. I couldn't care less about the 4K. When I stop doing regional tv commercial spots and start doing mass-market feature films for IMAX, I might change my tune.

Sorry Canon. Not interested. The vast majority of video producers on this planet are not going to be interested, either. I can afford it, but for $15K my $ is better spent elsewhere.

The Sony FS700 is going to find a lot of happy homes, especially if the metabones adapter works for it. 300FPS slow-motion at 1080p, built in ND filters, future 4k upgrade, great low-light ability, $8,000 price tag. How can the C300 compete with the new Sony FS700 at twice the price with less features?

The C300 can't even do 1080 60p for christsakes.

Well people are buying the C300 so it can't be all that bad, can it?

Maybe the people that want to use the C300 don't care about 1080/60p or 4K upgrades?

Maybe the people that want to use the C300 see more in it for what they do than they do in the FS700?

And just maybe evaluating the worth of these cameras is not something that is easily done by looking at a pair of spec sheets and saying "this one has more bells and whistles and is more shiny, so therefore is better."

Why don't you write up a review of when you've used both the FS700 and C300 and put it on youtube or vimeo so that we can see how you demonstrate the superiority of one over the other?